PrepTest 102

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Valid

Question Type:
Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Absurd idea - not Government support art → not Government allow art
Rephrase - not Government subsidy → not Government allow art

Answer Anticipation:
This is a tough Parallel Reasoning question because it presents an overall structure that is mirrored in each of the answers—a statement is called absurd, and that's supported by rephrasing it. As such, it's going to come down to how the original claim and the rephrasing relate to each other.

Looking at the statements in the stimulus, we can diagram them out as noted. We noted that "whatever" served as a sufficient condition indicator in the first statement. We treated "unless" as "if not" in the second, leading to that diagram.

With them drawn out, we can see that the rephrasing is a valid rephrasing of the statement, so we should look for an answer that presents two claims that are logically equivalent.

Answer Explanation:
not Arrested → not Break law; Breaks law → Arrested. These two statements are a valid rephrasing of each other, so this answer matches the stimulus.

Key Takeaway:
There are some very time-consuming Parallel Reasoning questions that require you to work through diagrams for each answer, as the overall structure matches the stimulus. These are great questions to skip and come back to if your conditional skills are weak—or even if they're strong, as they will take a bit of time!

Incorrect. not Arrested → not Break law; Arrested → Break law. The rephrasing is the illegal negation of the original claim, so it's not parallel to the stimulus.

Incorrect. Scientist supported by government → Successful; Successful → Scientist supported by government. The rephrasing is an illegal reversal of the original (or a negation, if you used "without" as "if not"), so it's not parallel to the stimulus.

Incorrect. Scientist supported by government → Successful; not Scientist supported by government → not Successful. The rephrasing here is an illegal reversal of the original statement, so it's not parallel to the stimulus.

Incorrect. Scientist supported by government → Successful . . . and we wouldn't diagram the rephrase. It includes a new concept—what is allowed—and so it's not parallel to the stimulus.